On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 1:14 PM Andrzej Warzynski
wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> Thank you for helping with the release!
>
> On 20/09/2021 18:40, Brian Cain via Openmp-dev wrote:
> > I also disabled flang (-no-flang) because of
> > memory exhaustion while trying to build. Is this increased memory
> > co
Ubuntu 20 binary uploaded. I also disabled flang (-no-flang) because of
memory exhaustion while trying to build. Is this increased memory
consumption expected or could it be a bug?
$ cat clang+llvm-13.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-20.04.tar.xz.sha256
488ff13c9a54f6b7b2aeb26e930da7d72e32a15542
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 3:16 PM Kevin P. Neal via cfe-dev <
cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 12:58:22PM -0700, David Blaikie via cfe-dev wrote:
> >>On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 12:53 PM Chris Lattner via cfe-dev
> >><[1]cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>Hi Phil
SLES12, Ubuntu 16.04 uploaded - now to the correct path - thanks for the
reminder, Hans!
e96a6402cc139323d64e20570c63b7e8c5d442e7338a1cae6c3234db06431883
clang+llvm-12.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz
dc498c1caabc57ae94b191fbcb887d7a557279f3eecb2206dbdd3ede5793dc98
clang+llvm-12.0.0-
Attempted upload of Ubuntu 16.04 (below), but it too ran out of space.
Maybe I'm copying to the wrong remote path? Dimitry, how did you get your
upload to work?
e96a6402cc139323d64e20570c63b7e8c5d442e7338a1cae6c3234db06431883
clang+llvm-12.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz
On Thu, Ma
Uploaded SLES12 but I did encounter the same ENOSPC that others have
reported.
$ cat clang+llvm-12.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-sles12.4.tar.xz.sha256
dc498c1caabc57ae94b191fbcb887d7a557279f3eecb2206dbdd3ede5793dc98
clang+llvm-12.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-sles12.4.tar.xz
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 4:27 PM Brian
lit tests require python 3.6 now but CMake nor test-release.sh screen for
this. It's definitely a nice-to-have, though.
Older platforms like SLES12 and Ubuntu Xenial don't have a native 3.6.
I'll add a local python build to get the test suite going.
Apologies -- I realize it's not as helpful for
Ubuntu16 uploaded:
$ cat clang+llvm-11.1.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz.sha256
c691a558967fb7709fb81e0ed80d1f775f4502810236aa968b4406526b43bee1
clang+llvm-11.1.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:06 PM Tom Stellard via Release-testers <
release-test...@list
Uploaded x86_64 Ubuntu 16.04:
$ cat clang+llvm-11.1.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz.sha256
3299ea97ed2bb9f6d583e718573d2153491a984ee5401c01e994f3fb98b0d607
clang+llvm-11.1.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:15 AM Tom Stellard via Release-testers <
rel
Uploaded Ubuntu 16, SLES12.
$ cat clang+llvm-11.0.1-x86_64-linux-sles12.4.tar.xz.sha256
clang+llvm-11.0.1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz.sha256
77cd59cf6f932cf2b3c9a68789d1bd3f7ba9f471a28f6ba25e25deb1a0806e0d
clang+llvm-11.0.1-x86_64-linux-sles12.4.tar.xz
67f18660231d7dd09dc93502f712613247
Uploaded Ubuntu 16 and SLES12:
d2cdda0d8b1f4fe44eb8a7751e488b5601d820dc260e81c73b05b5725ea4ca6a
clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc2-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz
da035f77cf043fc0c31842b0e54c1c47d893895ac109b261c6d91ea8aeccabc1
clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc2-x86_64-linux-sles12.4.tar.xz
On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at
Uploaded Ubuntu 16 tarball:
dcd37b46d2b3002d078ff38d967e674f4837090c4f61ee403f2cb0ada6a6dbd2
clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz
BTW - Neil -- if you decide to post binaries for Ubuntu 20, you should know
that there was a request in another thread to include LLDB in the ub
Uploaded binaries for SLES12 and Ubuntu 16 x86_64. I realized that I'd
forgotten rc3,4 ones so I uploaded them too.
$ cat clang+llvm-11.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz.sha256
clang+llvm-11.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-sles12.4.tar.xz.sha256
clang+llvm-11.0.0-rc4-x86_64-linux-sles12.4.tar.xz.
Uploaded Ubuntu 16 and SLES12 binaries:
$ cat clang+llvm-11.0.0-rc2-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz.sha256
clang+llvm-11.0.0-rc2-x86_64-linux-sles12.4.tar.xz.sha256
051d288dfc6ef9ff8e37d97b722695390427c617d3b538a93f2d0d413fb6f54a
clang+llvm-11.0.0-rc2-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz
5d1
Uploaded sles12, ubuntu16:
$ cat clang+llvm-10.0.1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz.sha256
48b83ef827ac2c213d5b64f5ad7ed082c8bcb712b46644e0dc5045c6f462c231
clang+llvm-10.0.1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz
$ cat clang+llvm-10.0.1-x86_64-linux-sles12.4.tar.xz.sha256
59f35fc7967b740315ed
Uploaded:
dcf43e25a77a2ffb4ffaa5a04babe409b2b3ffac07bc989a1dca730ecacb43c2
clang+llvm-10.0.1-rc4-x86_64-linux-sles12.4.tar.xz
6db54d9f55fb41877b23f4b89e7b68d44fcc5378d615d232c820307237dc33f7
clang+llvm-10.0.1-rc2-x86_64-linux-sles12.4.tar.xz
2d907945d8d8d5d2969c6947c50d91e100d5dd09ccb37214a811c11
Uploaded Ubuntu 18.04 binaries:
7ebc00479d05772e56c34c1b0f40295af2dd4a6b165d9107946ff2cdb7c219ac
clang+llvm-10.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-18.04.tar.xz
On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 7:49 AM Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev <
llvm-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> It took a bit longer than
Uploaded ubuntu 18 binaries.
$ cat clang+llvm-10.0.0-rc2-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-18.04.tar.xz.sha256
8ca2cd0e0ba2243c095134373b46ccad822192b0495ce13eb0af33e12f9d17e1
clang+llvm-10.0.0-rc2-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-18.04.tar.xz
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 4:34 PM Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
rel
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 12:29 AM Tom Stellard wrote:
> On 01/08/2020 09:24 AM, Brian Cain wrote:
> > Tom, the 9.0.1 final binaries didn't (yet?) make it to the github
> release page
> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/releases/tag/llvmorg-9.0.1
> >
>
> The binaries have been posted now.
>
>
I d
Tom, the 9.0.1 final binaries didn't (yet?) make it to the github release
page https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/releases/tag/llvmorg-9.0.1
I also checked https://releases.llvm.org/ because I recall some debate or
back-and-forth about where the releases should go and/or redirects or links
from
Uploaded Ubuntu 16.
608285fb0503ee6d15ce9acb8f4575bba4d78e06
clang+llvm-9.0.1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 10:07 PM Tom Stellard via cfe-dev <
cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just tagged the 9.0.1-final release. Testers can begin uploading
> binari
Uploaded ubuntu x86 binaries:
4361dc68e47b9972f0ec7db0c20411f60df90f28
clang+llvm-9.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz
085f223d48fd6fcf372f54ccdf8bbac403c279a2
clang+llvm-9.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz
b1627073e533975f0b4d4366b5f6e4dd44c7c6d8
clang+llvm-9.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-
Uploaded SLES11 and Ubuntu 16 binaries:
1c7895122974828c678f7059e0427d0228ab41e5
clang+llvm-9.0.0-rc4-x86_64-linux-sles11.3.tar.xz
d23219bc416afdf2a7eff11490dfb497001dc3a4
clang+llvm-9.0.0-rc4-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 5:26 AM Hans Wennborg via Release-testers
Oh! Indeed, that was probably it. I'll try again.
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 5:26 AM Hans Wennborg wrote:
> No, there should be no mismatch now. Maybe you ended up using a
> version of test-release.sh that doen't have the fixes?
>
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 6:47 PM Brian Cain wrote:
> >
> > When I bu
When I built rv2 for SLES11 linux I saw the same phase 2/3 mismatch. Is
that expected?
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019, 3:15 AM Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
release-test...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> 9.0.0-rc2 was tagged yesterday from the release_90 branch at r368683.
> In the Git
Uploaded Ubuntu 18.04 binaries:
190157033defcfc0796f06696a73979cb4201594
clang+llvm-9.0.0-rc1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-18.04.tar.xz
I had three phase 2/3 comparison failures, opened PR42855.
# Comparing Phase 2 and Phase 3 files
file MachO_x86_64.cpp.o differs between phase 2 and phase 3
file JIT
Uploaded SLES11.
a18ac0820acf7e4b19b917a143868a73ddb30a02
clang+llvm-8.0.1-x86_64-linux-sles11.3.tar.xz
On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 10:10 AM Brian Cain wrote:
> [previously I misdirected this message as a reply to the 9.0.0 thread, so
> I'm reproducing here just in case]
>
> Uploaded ubuntu 14.
>
[previously I misdirected this message as a reply to the 9.0.0 thread, so
I'm reproducing here just in case]
Uploaded ubuntu 14.
I had to kill some tests executing "lldb-vscode", they had been running for
12+ hours without completing.
b57383860c7e4317b0194d1a91836e01bd637c95
clang+llvm-8.0.1-x8
Uploaded ubuntu 14.
I had to kill some tests executing "lldb-vscode", they had been running for
12+ hours without completing.
b57383860c7e4317b0194d1a91836e01bd637c95
clang+llvm-8.0.1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 7:19 AM Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
releas
I noticed tests that didn't terminate on ubuntu-14.04 x86_64. Is PR40761
gating this release?
On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 2:21 PM Dimitry Andric via Release-testers <
release-test...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 11 Jul 2019, at 05:24, Tom Stellard via Release-testers <
> release-test...@lists.llvm.or
Uploaded Ubuntu 14 and SLES 11 x86 binaries.
8a5d880f3ed2b10d80660d1029b0c958878c3cb7
clang+llvm-7.1.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz
81f5b08cc8cac534e4a7405de46a2ef28d978477
clang+llvm-7.1.0-x86_64-linux-sles11.3.tar.xz
On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 7:00 PM Tom Stellard via Release-testers <
re
See you at The Tavern tonight at 6pm!
922 W 12th St, Austin, TX 78703
https://www.tavernaustin.com/
--
-Brian
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
Update: we will meet instead at "The Tavern":
922 W 12th St, Austin, TX 78703
https://www.tavernaustin.com/
11 April, 6:00pm
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019, 4:44 PM Brian Cain wrote:
> Okay I will find something more centrally located.
>
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2019, 2:26 PM Francesco Petrogalli <
> francesco.p
Okay I will find something more centrally located.
On Mon, Apr 8, 2019, 2:26 PM Francesco Petrogalli <
francesco.petroga...@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> 6 pm is a bit unfeasible for me, as I work on the other side of the city
> (Southwest Parkway). How about meeting downtown, which hopefully i
Thursday 11 April
Meet you at 6:00pm at Pour House (west of 183).
Pour House
11835 Jollyville Rd, Austin, TX 78759
http://pourhousepintsandpies.com/
--
-Brian
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/list
Ubuntu 18.04 looks good:
4f26c25bb628196101e781f11d79bd7af392c113
clang+llvm-7.1.0-rc1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-18.04.tar.xz
On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 4:27 PM Tom Stellard via Release-testers <
release-test...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just tagged 7.1.0-rc1. Testers, please begin test
I forgot Ubuntu 14.04 is still useful for some folks (including me), so
I've only just now built it and uploaded:
552ea458b70961b7922a4bbe9de1434688342dbf
clang+llvm-8.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 8:39 AM Brian Cain wrote:
> Uploaded ubuntu and SLES tarballs
On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 2:00 PM Tom Stellard via cfe-dev <
cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to follow up on the previous thread[1], where there was a
> consensus
> to disallow merge commits in the llvm github repository, and start a
> discussion
> about how we should enforce t
Uploaded ubuntu and SLES tarballs:
db0a5f7729507ddc4b161eff70cffcf5de052347
clang+llvm-8.0.0-x86_64-linux-sles11.3.tar.xz
2be69be355b012ae206dbc0ea7d84b831d77dc27
clang+llvm-8.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz
6aeb8aa0998d37be67d886b878f27de5e5ccc5e4
clang+llvm-8.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu
Hans,
Sorry for the delay -- uploaded rc5 binaries:
d52493c1c1082ae6be0a322a1b2d4a81e9f0d6c7
clang+llvm-8.0.0-rc5-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-18.04.tar.xz
af43eb9c4394175d26ff795d35dea2a5b4db80fa
clang+llvm-8.0.0-rc5-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz
635cb99931ac9b166fa60702ac05b8e3a09a0290
clang+
Uploaded SLES11, Ubuntu 14.04, 18.04 binaries.
9e59c0c667cd67c61600470d2e3107576b4707c8
clang+llvm-8.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz
0fd5690c11f045ae4d356619620778b0c17942ff
clang+llvm-8.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-18.04.tar.xz
6d1dc9b31d4f4d815b7cd18c8446404dc2a80a69
clang+llvm-8
Any tips or suggestions on how to isolate or identify this defect? It
seems non-trivial to bisect this failure.
Hans: presumably this bug should block the 8.0 release?
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 8:37 AM Brian Cain wrote:
> rc1 did not exhibit this mismatch. A repeat of the rc2 build repeated the
rc1 did not exhibit this mismatch. A repeat of the rc2 build repeated the
mismatch. I diff'd the disassembly between phase 2 and phase 3 and the
difference is the same on both builds. The difference follows:
# diff x86isel_p{2,3}.s
2c2
<
Phase2/Release/llvmCore-8.0.0-rc2.obj/lib/Target/X86/CMak
rc2 build on Ubuntu 16.04 saw a stage 2/3 mismatch on X86IselLowering.cpp.o
-- I didn't try to build rc1 for 16.04 but I can try it now to see if it's
there too.
I can pass along logs if anyone wants to investigate.
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 9:41 AM Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
release-test..
SLES and Ubuntu 14.04 tarballs uploaded. Sorry for the delay. I will try
and find time to make a build for bionic / 18.04 too.
99ec00702e39b096ace4fbce3d787b9e485b879e
clang+llvm-8.0.0-rc1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz
dbf204f70cb09ec459e5eb4fc14e8fa71292daa7
clang+llvm-8.0.0-rc1-x86_64
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:25 PM Tom Stellard wrote:
> On 01/08/2019 11:36 AM, Ian Tessier via Release-testers wrote:
> > Can the ubuntu tarballs be published to the download site? They're not
> available yet.
> >
>
> These are up on the download site now.
>
Tom, releases.llvm.org only shows Wind
Ubuntu and SLES tarballs uploaded. I haven't had a chance to make a SLES12
build yet, but I will try in the coming days.
f7553a0d66092ca0bbe1eab2af405523a18bafba
clang+llvm-7.0.1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-18.04.tar.xz
41db01a3b216df4fc22fae9c44e248889f9a01ed
clang+llvm-7.0.1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu
SLES binary uploaded:
181e1729263dcb1abc650311c4d42dbef13ae805
clang+llvm-7.0.1-rc2-x86_64-linux-sles11.3.tar.xz
... I will try to get to ubuntu this week.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 9:36 PM Tom Stellard via cfe-dev <
cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The 7.0.1-rc2 release has been tagged an
Uploaded SLES binaries:
07d289c409e359f1d453d3b3ff66dfa36889d28b
clang+llvm-7.0.0-x86_64-linux-sles11.3.tar.xz
2c07e6f7ebcb71852ad3fe8d69dc7ca3ee580a59
clang+llvm-7.0.0-x86_64-linux-sles12.3.tar.xz
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 6:42 AM Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
release-test...@lists.llvm.org
Uploaded sles binaries.
ba4e93b281bc53372cea22da624c02dad566a7b6
clang+llvm-7.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-sles11.3.tar.xz
d3cbc4a96adbfd5480601bd6a9faf62879976cf8
clang+llvm-7.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-sles12.3.tar.xz
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 9:13 AM Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
release-test...@lists.
SLES11 rc1 build failed, opened PR38589.
Uploaded SLES12 rc1:
39ba1263db364999357fae8c6f2829b8fce7cfdd
clang+llvm-7.0.0-rc1-x86_64-linux-sles12.3.tar.xz
On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 6:38 AM Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
release-test...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Dear testers,
>
> 7.0.0-rc1 was j
Ok, yes, you're right -- thanks for clarification.
On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 10:37 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> libc++.so should be a linker script that automatically pulls in libc++abi
> (see "Failed to read file header" in your output). And IIRC libc++abi is
> only one possible implementation that
Isn't libc++.so dependent on libc++abi.so?
On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 10:30 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> From what I can see all of the libraries without RPATH are runtime
> libraries that are used by binaries compiled with Clang. I think they don't
> have a dependency on other libraries in that dire
It was just brought to my attention that the RPATH configuration isn't
uniform among the libraries produced by the release. Some use
$ORIGIN../lib/ and others have none. Is this by design? It seems like it
might be ideal for all of them to be configured the same way. If that
makes sense I'll cr
Uploaded ubuntu, SLES11, SLES12 binaries.
4907dbd37f4e5265a2f1252d9d7b5e5b0a9c0ec1
clang+llvm-6.0.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz
360b26fcd9eafe5ca9c4baa89c38339bc587c094
clang+llvm-6.0.0-x86_64-linux-sles11.3.tar.xz
ce525cf949ef86409bc3f4f492035225989eecfd
clang+llvm-6.0.0-x86_64-linux-sle
SLES11 binaries for rc3 uploaded.
55b63de8adc12c67eb11abcf1a5f7132cca59b4e
clang+llvm-6.0.0-rc3-x86_64-linux-sles11.3.tar.xz
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
release-test...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Dear testers,
>
> 6.0.0-rc3 was just tagged, after r325901 o
Uploaded
afeb7f66eedd4d576ba8df9b4a551bb1908186e6
clang+llvm-6.0.0-rc1-linux-x86_64-sles11.3.tar.xz
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 11:53 AM, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
release-test...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Dear testers,
>
> Start your engines; 6.0.0-rc1 was just tagged.
>
> I know there ar
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
release-test...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Dear testers,
>
> The final version of 5.0.0 has just been tagged. There were no changes
> after rc5.
>
> Please build the final binaries and upload to the sftp.
>
> For those following alo
Uploaded SLES11 binary, no new failures. Test-suite no longer encounters
SIGILL (PR34168) -- addressed by r312334, thanks!
c09be7925c7eca370ea924d3b1da5e5ebf55146c
clang+llvm-5.0.0-rc5-linux-x86_64-sles11.3.tar.xz
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
release-test
Uploaded rc4 and rc3 for SLES11. No new issues.
5560fd8bf543bf3cdcaf55caef159664bd2749f3 clang+llvm-5.0.0-rc3-linux-
x86_64-sles11.3.tar.xz
effbb3a69efec75a67566d91dd4a9e685c2df15d clang+llvm-5.0.0-rc4-linux-
x86_64-sles11.3.tar.xz
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 6:52 PM, Hans Wennborg via Release-te
Opened https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34168
rc2 uploaded
to /home/testers/uploads/clang+llvm-5.0.0-rc2-linux-x86_64-sles11.3.tar.xz
-- I tried to use /data/testers-uploads/ but that failed.
292e39fe52d7404fcd5cd962cf8917600d45f507
rc2/clang+llvm-5.0.0-rc2-linux-x86_64-sles11.3.tar.xz
On
Much or all of "Bitcode/simd_ops/simd_ops_*.test" (254 failures) seem to be
failing for me with SIGILL. I'm guessing that my host CPU doesn't support
the instructions we're testing?
Is there already a bug on this failure? Are there any CPUID-style feature
detection flags I can easily add to mark
[earlier I had accidentally sent this message to only Hans, re-sending as
reply-all now]
When I tried rc1 on sles11.3 x86_64, msan's getrlimit test fails to build
for lack of prlimit(). SLES11.3 has glibc 2.11.3. Is there a minimum
required glibc? I think this test implementation previously use
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Tanya Lattner via cfe-dev <
cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> I personally find this email thread very hard to follow and read (this
> isn’t anyones fault.. its just a lot of replies). I am sure others do as
> well. I think it would be good to have a form/survey of
CentOS 6 uploaded and tested.
05141a39af0998770e4bf1953980a10f69aca450
clang+llvm-3.8.0-linux-x86_64-centos6.tar.xz
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 6:33 PM, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
release-test...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Dear testers,
>
> My list of blockers is empty, and there were no new
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 6:33 PM, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <
release-test...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Dear testers,
>
> My list of blockers is empty, and there were no new problems
> discovered with rc3, so I have gone ahead and tagged 3.8.0-final [1].
>
> Please build the final binaries an
Uploaded clang+llvm-3.8.0-rc3-linux-x86_64-sles11.3.tar.xz
and clang+llvm-3.8.0-rc3-linux-armhf-vivid.tar.xz
f8f8b0ff8f9709cbf63097727a96fde5054efefe
rc3/clang+llvm-3.8.0-rc3-linux-x86_64-sles11.3.tar.xz
9202d52a9bff5464d0b76750c41ffec0d7d99c17
rc3/clang+llvm-3.8.0-rc3-linux-armhf-vivid.tar.xz
Tested RC2 w/SLES11.3, x86_64. No regressions.
81c1ea3fafee883fbbd396779d1e62714304eff6
rc2/clang+llvm-3.8.0-rc2-linux-x86_64-sles11.3.tar.xz
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev <
cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Dear testers,
>
> Release Candidate 2 has just been tagged
I built rc1 on Ubuntu 15.04 armhf. Many tests fail (560, nearly all are
libc++ and libc++abi). There's also a handful of unexpected passing tests
(12).
e29ac68df06f7fad8c773b7da9778469d84f3f32
rc1/clang+llvm-3.8.0-rc1-linux-armhf-vivid.tar.xz
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Hans Wennborg wr
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Brian Cain wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:31 PM, Eric Fiselier wrote:
>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Brian Cain via cfe-dev <
>> cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 11SP3 x86_64
>>>
>>> Looks like I see several failure
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:31 PM, Eric Fiselier wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Brian Cain via cfe-dev <
> cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 11SP3 x86_64
>>
>> Looks like I see several failures that weren't in 3.7.1. Is there any
>> way to tell whether t
SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 11SP3 x86_64
Looks like I see several failures that weren't in 3.7.1. Is there any way
to tell whether these are regressions vs new-to-3.8.0-but-failing? The
MSan ones were in 3.7.1 but the ThreadPoolTest and the libc++ errors were
not in 3.7.1.
Fai
I can do SLES. I also have an arm7l ubuntu 15.x machine if no one else is
already covering that target.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Nikola Smiljanic
wrote:
> I'll do Fedora and openSUSE.
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Daniel Sanders > wrote:
>
>> Sounds good to me. I'll do the usual
73 matches
Mail list logo
